Did Abraham Lincoln preserve democracy during the Civil War, or did he endanger it in the process? To explore this paradox, we’re joined by renowned historian and Lincoln scholar Allen Guelzo, author of Our Ancient Faith. Guelzo takes us deep into the high-stakes decisions of Lincoln’s presidency, from the suspension of habeas corpus to the Emancipation Proclamation. He argues that Lincoln’s vision of democracy was rooted in a moral imperative to save the Union as a global symbol of self-governance. But was his willingness to push the boundaries of executive power a necessary evil—or a dangerous precedent?

We discuss how Lincoln reconciled his wartime decisions with the principles of the Founding Fathers, why the 1864 election might be democracy's greatest test, and how his book, Our Ancient Faith, sheds light on Lincoln’s belief in the Union as a sacred trust. Whether you see Lincoln as the Great Emancipator or the reluctant authoritarian, this episode will leave you rethinking what it means to lead a democracy in its darkest hour.

Did Abraham Lincoln preserve democracy during the Civil War, or did he endanger it in the process? To explore this paradox, we&rsquo;re joined by renowned historian and Lincoln scholar Allen Guelzo, author of Our Ancient Faith. Guelzo takes us deep into the high-stakes decisions of Lincoln&rsquo;s presidency, from the suspension of habeas corpus to the Emancipation Proclamation. He argues that Lincoln&rsquo;s vision of democracy was rooted in a moral imperative to save the Union as a global symbol of self-governance. But was his willingness to push the boundaries of executive power a necessary evil&mdash;or a dangerous precedent?
We discuss how Lincoln reconciled his wartime decisions with the principles of the Founding Fathers, why the 1864 election might be democracy's greatest test, and how his book, Our Ancient Faith, sheds light on Lincoln&rsquo;s belief in the Union as a sacred trust. Whether you see Lincoln as the Great Emancipator or the reluctant authoritarian, this episode will leave you rethinking what it means to lead a democracy in its darkest hour.

For history lovers who listen to podcasts, History Unplugged is the most comprehensive show of its kind. It's the only show that dedicates episodes to both interviewing experts and answering questions from its audience. First, it features a call-in show where you can ask our resident historian (Scott Rank, PhD) absolutely anything (What was it like to be a Turkish sultan with four wives and twelve concubines? If you were sent back in time, how would you kill Hitler?). Second, it features long-form interviews with best-selling authors who have written about everything. Topics include gruff World War II generals who flew with airmen on bombing raids, a war horse who gained the rank of sergeant, and presidents who gave their best speeches while drunk.

A show about American history, world history, World Wars 1 & 2, the Civil War, and much more.

History Unplugged Podcast

For history lovers who listen to podcasts, History Unplugged is the most comprehensive show of its kind. It's the only show that dedicates episodes to both interviewing experts and answering questions from its audience. First, it features a call-in show where you can ask our resident historian (Scott Rank, PhD) absolutely anything (What was it like to be a Turkish sultan with four wives and twelve concubines? If you were sent back in time, how would you kill Hitler?). Second, it features long-form interviews with best-selling authors who have written about everything. Topics include gruff World War II generals who flew with airmen on bombing raids, a war horse who gained the rank of sergeant, and presidents who gave their best speeches while drunk.

History Unplugged

Did Lincoln Save Global Democracy or Undermine It Using Wartime Powers?

The Battles of Lexington and Concord in April 1775, known as the "shot heard round the world," marked the first military engagements of the American Revolution. Ralph Waldo Emerson named it that because it launched revolutionary movements in Europe and beyond, marking it as a key moment in the fight for liberty and self-governance. But this moment was global in more ways than inspiring other nations. The quest for independence by the 13 North American colonies against British rule rapidly escalated into a worldwide conflict. The Patriots forged alliances with Britain’s key adversaries—France, Spain, and the Netherlands—securing covert arms supplies initially, which evolved into open warfare by 1779. French and Spanish naval campaigns in the Caribbean diverted British forces from North America to defend valuable sugar colonies, while American privateers disrupted British trade, bolstering the rebel economy. All of this international involvement was promoted by the Founding Fathers, because the Declaration of Independence was translated into French, Spanish, Dutch, and other languages and distributed by them across Europe to garner sympathy and support from nations like France and the Netherlands.
 
Spain’s separate war against Britain in Florida and South America, alongside French efforts to spark uprisings in British-controlled India, further strained Britain’s ability to quash the rebellion. Post-independence, the consequences rippled globally: Britain and Spain tightened their grip on remaining colonies, Native American tribes faced heightened land encroachments due to the loss of British protections, and enslaved African Americans who fought for Britain, lured by promises of freedom, were relocated to Nova Scotia and later Sierra Leone.

To explore this new framework of the Revolutionary War is today’s guest, Richard Bell, author of “The American Revolution and the Fate of the World.”

The Battles of Lexington and Concord in April 1775, known as the "shot heard round the world," marked the first military engagements of the American Revolution. Ralph Waldo Emerson named it that because it launched revolutionary movements in Europe and beyond, marking it as a key moment in the fight for liberty and self-governance. But this moment was global in more ways than inspiring other nations. The quest for independence by the 13 North American colonies against British rule rapidly escalated into a worldwide conflict. The Patriots forged alliances with Britain&rsquo;s key adversaries&mdash;France, Spain, and the Netherlands&mdash;securing covert arms supplies initially, which evolved into open warfare by 1779. French and Spanish naval campaigns in the Caribbean diverted British forces from North America to defend valuable sugar colonies, while American privateers disrupted British trade, bolstering the rebel economy. All of this international involvement was promoted by the Founding Fathers, because the Declaration of Independence was translated into French, Spanish, Dutch, and other languages and distributed by them across Europe to garner sympathy and support from nations like France and the Netherlands. &nbsp; Spain&rsquo;s separate war against Britain in Florida and South America, alongside French efforts to spark uprisings in British-controlled India, further strained Britain&rsquo;s ability to quash the rebellion. Post-independence, the consequences rippled globally: Britain and Spain tightened their grip on remaining colonies, Native American tribes faced heightened land encroachments due to the loss of British protections, and enslaved African Americans who fought for Britain, lured by promises of freedom, were relocated to Nova Scotia and later Sierra Leone.
To explore this new framework of the Revolutionary War is today&rsquo;s guest, Richard Bell, author of &ldquo;The American Revolution and the Fate of the World.&rdquo;

The American Revolution was a World War in All but Name

The brain acts in strange ways during wartime.  Even in active combat situations, when soldiers are one mistake away from death, many can’t fire on their enemies because their brain is triggering compassion centers against other soldiers. Studies of World War II show that while soldiers were willing to risk death, only 15% to 20% fired their weapons in intense combat, indicating a reluctance to kill. That’s why successful military leaders were able to motivate their soldiers with ideas of unfairness and justice, that their enemies weren’t human to make them better at fighting and killing.

All this goes to show that if you want to understand war, you have to understand how the brain makes sense of it. Does war make all of us retreat to our lizard brain and act on pure instinct – so the only way to win is pumping out manipulative propaganda to the masses and use modern technologies like AI and social media exploit the brain's cognitive vulnerabilities? Well, many nations like Russia and China are already using these to their advantage.

 Or can we bring higher thinking to the matter? Is a researcher like Robert Sapolsky right when he argues that we can stop wars by persuading enough people that it is bad and pointless.

Today’s guest is Nicholas Wright, author of “Warhead: How the Brain Shapes War and War Shapes the Brain.”  He’s a neuroscientist and advisor to the Pentagon. We explore how our brains respond under pressure and how these instincts can shape everything from battlefield outcomes to boardroom decisions. He argues that while conflict is inevitable, it’s not unmanageable - if we understand how the brain drives fear, trust, aggression, and judgment.

The brain acts in strange ways during wartime.&nbsp; Even in active combat situations, when soldiers are one mistake away from death, many can&rsquo;t fire on their enemies because their brain is triggering compassion centers against other soldiers. Studies of World War II show that while soldiers were willing to risk death, only 15% to 20% fired their weapons in intense combat, indicating a reluctance to kill. That&rsquo;s why successful military leaders were able to motivate their soldiers with ideas of unfairness and justice, that their enemies weren&rsquo;t human to make them better at fighting and killing.
All this goes to show that if you want to understand war, you have to understand how the brain makes sense of it. Does war make all of us retreat to our lizard brain and act on pure instinct &ndash; so the only way to win is pumping out manipulative propaganda to the masses and use modern technologies like AI and social media exploit the brain's cognitive vulnerabilities? Well, many nations like Russia and China are already using these to their advantage.
&nbsp;Or can we bring higher thinking to the matter? Is a researcher like Robert Sapolsky right when he argues that we can stop wars by persuading enough people that it is bad and pointless.
Today&rsquo;s guest is Nicholas Wright, author of &ldquo;Warhead: How the Brain Shapes War and War Shapes the Brain.&rdquo; &nbsp;He&rsquo;s a neuroscientist and advisor to the Pentagon. We explore how our brains respond under pressure and how these instincts can shape everything from battlefield outcomes to boardroom decisions. He argues that&nbsp;while conflict is inevitable, it&rsquo;s not unmanageable -&nbsp;if we understand how the brain drives fear, trust, aggression, and judgment.

How Napoleon and Churchill Used Neuroscience to Make a Better Soldier and More Loyal Public

William F. Buckley Jr., the charismatic intellectual who defined modern American conservatism, was famously skilled at forging friendships across the ideological divide, a talent that helped him both shape the political landscape and navigate public opinion. His capacity for personal charm allowed him to be a public extremist and a private moderate, keeping him in the good graces of the liberal elite, including figures like Senator George McGovern and activist Allard Lowenstein, even as he worked to advance his conservative agenda; however, this magnanimity had its limits, most famously with his true enemy, Gore Vidal.

Today's guest is Josh Cohen, author of William F. Buckley Jr.'s Guide to Friendship in a Polarized Era, and we explore how this patrician gatekeeper of the right strategically used ideological "frenemies" and acquaintances, such as the surprising connection with Hugh Hefner, to legitimize his movement and advance his influence, culminating in the infamous, televised confrontation with Gore Vidal that exposed how even Buckley's renowned decorum shattered when his core beliefs were challenged.

William F. Buckley Jr., the charismatic intellectual who defined modern American conservatism, was famously skilled at forging friendships across the ideological divide, a talent that helped him both shape the political landscape and navigate public opinion. His capacity for personal charm allowed him to be a public extremist and a private moderate, keeping him in the good graces of the liberal elite, including figures like Senator George McGovern and activist Allard Lowenstein, even as he worked to advance his conservative agenda; however, this magnanimity had its limits, most famously with his true enemy, Gore Vidal.
Today's guest is Josh Cohen, author of William F. Buckley Jr.'s Guide to Friendship in a Polarized Era, and we explore how this patrician gatekeeper of the right strategically used ideological "frenemies" and acquaintances, such as the surprising connection with Hugh Hefner, to legitimize his movement and advance his influence, culminating in the infamous, televised confrontation with Gore Vidal that exposed how even Buckley's renowned decorum shattered when his core beliefs were challenged.

Did Lincoln Save Global Democracy or Undermine It Using Wartime Powers?

In 1 playlist(s)

History Unplugged

Social links

Follow podcast

Recent clips